MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W170792156

Investigating Effects of Psychological Factors on Commuting Mode Choice Behavior

2012· article· en· W170792156 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmed O Osman, Khandker Nurul Habib, Alejandro Tudela, Amer Shalaby

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Board 91st Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban Transport and Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyStructural equation modelingMode (computer interface)Social psychologyLikert scaleHabitDevelopmental psychologyStatisticsMathematicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper utilizes socio-psychometric data measured using ad hoc surveys to investigate the influence of attitudes, affective appraisal and habit formation on commuting mode choice. The dataset was collected in 2009-2010 in Edmonton, Alberta. In addition to common socioeconomic, demographic and modal attributes, the survey gathered psychological information regarding habitual behaviour, affective appraisal and personal attitudes. Different psychometric tools were used to capture psychological factors affecting mode choice. Habitual behaviour was measured by using Verplanken’s response-frequency questionnaire. Affective appraisal was indirectly estimated using the Osgood's semantic differential. Five-point Likert scales were used to measure attitude. The Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) approach was used to investigate the effects of psychological factors on mode choice behaviour. SEM captures the latent nature of psychological factors and uses path diagram to identify the directionality as well as intensity of the relationships. The investigation reveals that passengers have positive emotions towards their chosen mode. Further, evidence of the superiority of the car as a travel alternative was established in terms of strong habit towards it, such that passengers would use the car for almost every single trip.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.146
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Board 91st Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardSame topicUrban Transport and AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207